Fixed correcting branch sizes #35
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
svick
changed the title
|
I missed a case when one expansion of short jump forces a previous short jump to be expanded too, that's not fixed too. |
|
Thanks! I'll take a look now. |
ashmind
reviewed
Feb 4, 2021
| var operandValue = ((Instruction)instruction.Operand).Offset - (instruction.Offset + instruction.GetSize()); | ||
| if (operandValue >= sbyte.MinValue && operandValue <= sbyte.MaxValue) | ||
| continue; | ||
| // expanding one short branch can force a previous short branch to be expanded, so we have to do this repeatedly |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this mean that instead of doing that repeatedly we can go once but in reverse?
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When using Unbreakable on some async code (see #1 (comment)), I got InvalidProgramException. This happens when, after AssemblyGuard's rewrite, there is a
br.sinstruction that jumps just over the limit of 127 bytes. Because Unbreakable computes IL offsets incorrectly, it decides the instruction does not need to be modified tobr, even when it has to be.The added test gets into the same situation by inserting over 100
nopinstructions using empty statements. Without this fix, the test fails for me with: